Weakness in Criminal Profiling

[robhouse]

By the way Jon, I was kidding. It is, in fact, the world famous Ripper expert extraordinaire Stewart Evans. One and the same.

Rob

[mklhawley]

Well, if it is the Stewart Evans, I use your research on my YouTube video of Francis Tumbleby's Gravestone! I mention you at the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zei2rD8u0tg

Mike

[Mitch Rowe]

"Criminal Profiling" is used every day by Police Officials of every rank and file. Example: If a bunch of TVs and VCRs are stolen out of the back of a Semi Tractor Trailor while it was stopped at a stop sign in a drug infested neighborhood the police dont look for suspects at the local nursing home! If a body is found after being set on fire post death its reasonable to assume the killer knew the victim. Ect.. Ect...
Investigators use these profiling techniques all the time and they are valid investigative tools that work for the most part.
The thing is... When trying to profile an SK who for the most part picks victims at random its not going to work so good because it seems SKs can be anyone from all walks of life.
What I always keep in mind is that its Probable the perpetrator is this or that. How likely is it that JTR was an 80 year old blind woman? Not very.. But if there were solid proof JTR was this sort of person I would have no trouble accepting it.

[mklhawley]

Mithch,

Would I be correct in saying that the physical evidence takes priority in an investigation, and profiling can fill in the cracks in order to illuminate possibilities?

Mike

[Barnaby]

Taking Stock in Criminal Profiling (Vol. 34, No. 4, 437-453 (2007)) states: The use of criminal profiling (CP) in criminal investigations has continued to increase despite scant empirical evidence that it is effective. Narrative review results suggest that the CP literature rests largely on commonsense justifications. Results from the 1st meta-analysis indicate that self-labeled profiler/experienced-investigator groups did not outperform comparison groups in predicting offenders' cognitive processes, physical attributes, offense behaviors, or social habits and history, although they were marginally better at predicting overall offender characteristics. Results of the 2nd meta-analysis indicate that self-labeled profilers were not significantly better at predicting offense behaviors, but outperformed comparison groups when predicting overall offender characteristics, cognitive processes, physical attributes, and social history and habits. Methodological shortcomings of the data and the implications of these findings for the practical utility of CP are discussed.

In fairness, the metanalysis did reveal that the profilers outperformed comparison groups in overall offender characteristics.

[ghoulstonstreet]

Tumbletey, Twomblety. Timulty

If you are honestly asking if I am a ripper expert - far from it. My education, training, and research is in science and the scientific process, specifically, the inherent problem of confirmation bias. Scientists are trained to be objective, yet the human element always rears its ugly head. Briefly, there is a human tendency to emphasize supportive evidence and simultaneously de-emphasize contradictory evidence. It is a type of wishful thinking. I personally favor Francis Tumblety as the Ripper, yet, I may be duped by my own confirmation bias. My solution was to join this group (Ripper experts in my opinion) in order to check my logic. I have not been disappointed, especially in the Tumblety section.

Mike

I just finished "America's First Serial Killer", all about postulating that Tumblety was the Ripper. The timing is right, i.e., he was in the right place at the right time and he was certainly pathological. But I have a big problem with it. Would you exrend your opinion? The fact is that sexual sadists go after the people who are sexual objects to them. So if you view women as sexual objects you are going to go after women. If you are a pederast you are going to attack children. If you're a gay man you're going to go after men. Now, Tumblety was definitely gay. Because of that I can't see him going after women, especially in the personal. vicious, bloody, hands-dirty way that the Ripper did. Do you see what I mean? Gay men don't want to even touch women, let alone hold and cut off their reproductive organs. So what do you think?

[lynn cates]

analysis

Hello Ghoul. Your analysis seems reasonable. Would it make a difference if the murders were done out of a rage which was directed towards that gender?

The best.
LC

[mklhawley]

Barnaby, I agree. I believe the danger in using criminal profiling is to overemphasize it to the point of de-emphasizing empirical evidence. Here is where I support the use of profiling as with ghoulstonstreet's comments. Serial profiler, Brent Turvey, points out that Tumblety should not be labelled as a gay serial killer, but a true woman hater. He points out Tumblety's own comments about previously being married, but then discovering the wife was a prostitute. These are anger/aggression acts to completely humiliate a woman/prostitute.

What is convincing me about Tumblety is the pattern of empirical evidence.

[tnb]

In my opinion profiling has its place but when it works it works because it takes into account TIME and PLACE. In fact these are two of the most important concepts in profiling. In other words - context.

The idea that by studying how a serial killer acted in the 1960s (with certain contemporary social norms and ideals) or how another communicated with the police in the 1990's (with a wide choice of communication methods) or the sexual preferences of another in the 1980's (with particular social and sexual preoccupations, taboos and emerging groups) can tell us anything concrete about a serial killer from the late Victorian era is ridiculous. The playing field has changed so much, and killers, like all criminals - whether deliberately or not -learn from those who have gone before them; they behave according to how they expect the police to behave going on the methods of the time, if they plan they do so using mental examples of how they know people have been caught before...etc etc etc

A profiler in 1888 may have been very useful. But one looking back with a 21st century mindset, with the best will in the world, is on a hiding to nothing. 'Jack' may not have been the first serial killer, but he was the first to stir up an international hornet's nest and kick off one of the biggest police hunts of all time. He laid the groundwork for a lot of killers who came after, but we cannot look at how they acted and in turn refer back, because 'Jack had little or no prior knowledge to fall back on. We cannot say that of any criminal since.

In one way, every serial killer since has been a 'Jack the Ripper tribute act'.

[mklhawley]

This is the FBI report on Jack the Ripper:

FBI report suggests Jack the Ripper: was a white male, 28-36 years of age; was of average intelligence, lucky not clever; was single, never married, and had difficulty in interacting with people in general and women in particular; was nocturnal and not accountable to anyone; blended in with his surroundings; had poor personal hygiene, and appeared disheveled; was personally inadequate with a low self image and diminished emotional responses; was a quiet loner, withdrawn and asocial; was of lower social class; lived or worked in Whitechapel, and committed the crimes close to home; had a menial job with little or no interaction with the public; was employed Monday to Friday, possibly as a butcher, mortician's helper, medical examiner's assistant, or hospital attendant (the proximity of London Hospital was noted in the profile); was the product of a broken home, and lacked consistent care and stable adult role models as a child; was raised by a dominant female figure who drank heavily, consorted with different men, and physically, possibly sexually, abused him; set fires and abused animals as a child; hated, feared, and was intimidated by women; internalized his anger; was mentally disturbed and sexually inadequate, with much generalized rage directed against women; desired power, control, and dominance; behaved erratically; engaged in sexually motivated attacks to neuter his victims; drank in local pubs prior to the murders; hunted nightly, and was observed walking all over Whitechapel during the early morning hours; did not have medical knowledge or surgical expertise; was probably interviewed by police at some point; did not write any of the “Jack the Ripper” letters, and would not have publicly challenged the police; and did not commit suicide after the murders stopped.

Some of these profiles (not all) certainly suggests 21st century eyes being out of context. I think tnb is onto something.

Mike

[Phil Carter]

This is the FBI report on Jack the Ripper:

FBI report suggests Jack the Ripper: was a white male, 28-36 years of age; was of average intelligence, lucky not clever; was single, never married, and had difficulty in interacting with people in general and women in particular; was nocturnal and not accountable to anyone; blended in with his surroundings; had poor personal hygiene, and appeared disheveled; was personally inadequate with a low self image and diminished emotional responses; was a quiet loner, withdrawn and asocial; was of lower social class; lived or worked in Whitechapel, and committed the crimes close to home; had a menial job with little or no interaction with the public; was employed Monday to Friday, possibly as a butcher, mortician's helper, medical examiner's assistant, or hospital attendant (the proximity of London Hospital was noted in the profile); was the product of a broken home, and lacked consistent care and stable adult role models as a child; was raised by a dominant female figure who drank heavily, consorted with different men, and physically, possibly sexually, abused him; set fires and abused animals as a child; hated, feared, and was intimidated by women; internalized his anger; was mentally disturbed and sexually inadequate, with much generalized rage directed against women; desired power, control, and dominance; behaved erratically; engaged in sexually motivated attacks to neuter his victims; drank in local pubs prior to the murders; hunted nightly, and was observed walking all over Whitechapel during the early morning hours; did not have medical knowledge or surgical expertise; was probably interviewed by police at some point; did not write any of the “Jack the Ripper” letters, and would not have publicly challenged the police; and did not commit suicide after the murders stopped.

Some of these profiles (not all) certainly suggests 21st century eyes being out of context. I think tnb is onto something.

Mike

Hello Mike,

...and the latest profiling puts the killer living in the vicinity of Flower and Dean Street and Thrawl St, as a local, fairly uneducated man, unassuming, looking like a cross between Freddie Mercury and a prison guard (in my opinion)... well, that was the impression I got from the programme shown recently on TV. I believe it is on Youtube, 5 parts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4KjQSSyqAY

The investigation is led by one of Scotland Yard's finest.

best wishes

Phil

[ghoulstonstreet]

Been Reading Crime

Hello Ghoul. Your analysis seems reasonable. Would it make a difference if the murders were done out of a rage which was directed towards that gender?

The best.
LC

Hi, Always nice to hear from you. You write a lot. Are you in the UK? I hear it's really wet and unseasonable cold in the North.
Have you ever gone to a JTR convention?
As per your above question, in the 25 (approx) true crime books I've read I have never seen a gay guy kill women. I have never seen a straight guy kill men in a sexual in-your-face kind of way. They've strung up a few but they haven't disemboweled any that I know of. I do not ever remember hearing of a pederast going after adults. Etcetera. I believe the mental aberration involves pathological regard towards the potential sexual partner, i.e. one who is "attractive" to the killer. Of course rage is involved but there seems to also be of necessity sexual "attraction" too. Please give me your opinion. Thanks

[jonwilson]

and had difficulty in interacting with people in general and women in particular;

I don't believe this to be the case with Jack. Just because someone kills women or hates them does not mean that they are incapable of interacting with women. I know this is a criminal profile of Jack done by the fbi. Look atTed Bundy for example. Some might say he hated women because he killed them, but he came across as a charming and smart and normal man. Laura Richards who also did a criminal profile on Jack said that Jack having short term relations with women was not out of the question. Clearly Jack was able to go up to prostitutes and gain their trust and perhaps even charm them.

[protohistorian]

Indeed Barnaby, I would go a step further and point out that while profiling is not as empirical as some might wish, it sure represents a quantum leap from conceptions like the Portuguese are mutilators. Profiling, like any other mental conceptualization, grows with experience. The first paper on Dactylgraphy was 1886 yet the first successful use of them in an identification was some 6 years later in Argentina. (Frances Rojas was the suspect for those interested).

[Septic Blue]

... the latest profiling puts the killer living in the vicinity of Flower and Dean Street and Thrawl St, ... that was the impression I got from the programme shown recently on TV.

'Screen-Capture' (i.e. photograph of television screen) from "Revealed" Jack the Ripper: The First Serial Killer (2006)

A Portion of Kim Rossmo's 'Criminal Geographic Target' analysis (i.e. his proprietary geographic profile), utilizing the murder-sites of the 'MacNaghten-Five' victims of 'Jack the Ripper'

Rossmo's CGT designates a rectangular search-area that is divided into 40,000 'cells'; to each of which a proprietary 'distance-decay' function - including empirically derived constants and exponents - is applied. Each 'cell' is thereby assessed as to its likelihood of having played host to the residence of 'Jack the Ripper'. The resultant probability distribution is depicted by way of color-coded isopleths, which indicate descending levels of probability density, in the following order: Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Aqua, Blue.

Note the 'peaks' (Red), which indicate the greatest concentrations of probability density:

- The vicinity of the southeast corner of New Goulston Street / Middlesex Street, Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel

- The vicinity of the southwest corner (Lolesworth Buildings) and northeast corner of Thrawl Street / George Street, Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields *

- The vicinity of the northeast corner of Osborn Place / Brick Lane, Parishes of St. Mary Whitechapel & Christ Church Spitalfields

* Rossmo described this, the 'highest' of the three 'peaks', in the following manner:

"… the peak area, where the profile is falling on, covers Flower & Dean Street, Fashion Street, Thrawl Street, …"

We 'Ripperologists' have somehow interpreted this to mean that according to Rossmo: "'Jack the Ripper' probably lived in Flower & Dean Street".

This is a gross misrepresentation of Rossmo's conclusions; especially in light of the fact that the red portion of this 'peak' barely comes into contact with Flower & Dean Street – doing so, only in the immediate vicinity of #5, a large doss house on the south side of the thoroughfare, opposite #56 (i.e. the 'White House').

Rossmo's analysis merely suggests that the 'highest' point (i.e. the immediate vicinity of Lolesworth Buildings), within this, the 'highest peak'; should be perceived as having been the single most likely residence of 'Jack the Ripper'. That is a 'far cry' from suggesting that he probably lived there.

Again;

… the single most likely residence of 'Jack the Ripper'.

… a 'far cry' from suggesting that he probably lived there.

In fact, I would venture to guess that this 'peak' area (i.e. the immediate vicinity of Lolesworth Buildings) accounts for no more than three-to-four percent of the total probability distribution, generated by Rossmo's analysis.

So, if Kim Rossmo has suggested a three-to-four percent probability that 'Jack the Ripper' resided in the immediate vicinity of Lolesworth Buildings, Thrawl Street / George Street, Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields; then we can hardly accuse him of having asserted that 'Jack the Ripper' probably lived there.

This is where the general concept of 'profiling' gets its 'bum rap' - so to speak: From our own misinterpretations.

Profiling is not used to isolate a seemingly 'likely' element of society or geographic area, within the realm of investigative consideration. Conversely; it is not used to eliminate a seemingly 'unlikely' element of society or geographic area, from the realm of investigative consideration. It is used to identify the seemingly 'likely' and seemingly 'unlikely', for the enhancement of investigative focus. That's it: Period!

Again;

... for the enhancement of investigative focus.

Has anyone concluded that 'Jack the Ripper' was probably a male?

Yes? … You have? … Then you are a profiler!